(06-01-2013 12:07 AM)Raskolnikov Wrote: In this War, there isn't a true-clear-cut Good guy and Bad Guy.

It's all a matter of perspective, is it not?

No, it's a matter of material conditions surrounding both sides, who supports those sides, what they've done and so on.

No one is willing to talk about how the FSA has been an oppressive force against Orthodox Christians and Shia muslims alike, or how they're being aded by Monarchist factions as well as our "fellow Libyan heroes" who've been busy killing off African migrants for their own gain as well as beating up to the point of near death of anyone wanting women's rights in Libya.

It's matter of we know the US simply wants Assad out, and that's it. there's nothing democratic about this rebellion, Bahrain is far more democratic yet no one is making a thread about it. About Saudi Tanks rolling through and crushing citizens, while the media remains silent and we just bandgwagon unto whatever seems humanitarian then forget about it after it's done.

It's a matter of actions, history, allies, detractors and so on.

Perspective is the subjective matter that comes through objective learning.

I'm actually with the antimuffdiver on this one. WTF happened? Me and muffs have agreed on two political topics in a row. I am for war only as a last resort though, and certainly not for aggressive/preemptive war. It is sometimes necessary for the oppressed to rebel against their masters.

(08-01-2013 11:15 PM)Dark Light Wrote: I'm actually with the antimuffdiver on this one. WTF happened? Me and muffs have agreed on two political topics in a row. I am for war only as a last resort though, and certainly not for aggressive/preemptive war. It is sometimes necessary for the oppressed to rebel against their masters.

(08-01-2013 11:15 PM)Dark Light Wrote: I'm actually with the antimuffdiver on this one. WTF happened? Me and muffs have agreed on two political topics in a row. I am for war only as a last resort though, and certainly not for aggressive/preemptive war. It is sometimes necessary for the oppressed to rebel against their masters.

Careful, three in a row and the world will implode.

Nah, kc and I agreed three times and the world did not implode.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

(09-01-2013 06:53 AM)Chas Wrote: Nah, kc and I agreed three times and the world did not implode.

Son, that just defies physics.

I know.

A more likely explanation is that the world did implode on that timeline but didn't on this one because the laws of physics are subtly different now from what we thought they were when they were different on the timeline that imploded that we're no longer on because the laws of physics on that timeline had different causality relationships that required timelines to diverge when before that there was only one timeline and multiple timelines weren't even possible until the implosion caused a bifurcation of reality all because we're now living in kc's delusion.

Much simpler, see?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

A more likely explanation is that the world did implode on that timeline but didn't on this one because the laws of physics are subtly different now from what we thought they were when they were different on the timeline that imploded that we're no longer on because the laws of physics on that timeline had different causality relationships that required timelines to diverge when before that there was only one timeline and multiple timelines weren't even possible until the implosion caused a bifurcation of reality all because we're now living in kc's delusion.